Time to End Up Birthright Citizenship

Birthright citizenship has been one of the most controversial issues in America and always in the heated center of immigration reform battles. In addition, bills to deny birthright citizenship have been introduced in Congress many times so far. According to the report from Devin Burghart, in the 113th Congress, Rep. Steve King, an outspoken hardliner on immigration, introduced a bill on January 3 to "require that only the children of citizens, legal immigrants permanently living in the country or immigrants in the military, be granted citizenship" (Burghart). King is not making a fuse about nothing. Nowadays, the United States and Canada are the only developed nations in the world that grant automatic U.S. citizenship to almost all children born in the United States, regardless of whether the parents are U.S. citizens, legal residents, temporary visitors, or illegal aliens in the United States. According to Every year, about eight percent of all U.S. births come from at least one illegal-alien parent, according to the Pew Hispanic Center. Moreover, alone with a range of social problems publicly ascribed to birthright citizenship, there has been a great calling for abolishing such a clause from the U.S. immigration laws. I am one of the opponents of birthright citizenship.

The most obvious point showing that birthright citizenship is unacceptable is that it does not embody the meaning of citizenship which reflects more than where one was born. Citizens must take on their civic duties, for example, paying taxes, complying with laws, and so on. Most of all, citizens must have a strong allegiance to their country, in this case, America. Therefore, citizenship actually involves great responsibilities and genuine commitment, and should be strictly granted to those fully eligible immigrants. However, in households where "anchor babies" were raised up, it is hard to see signs of patriotism that normal citizens should have: they do not pay income tax, sometimes...

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

...CitizenshipBirthright Under Fire
Summary
During one morning in Washington, DC, Senator Mitch McConnell who is the Senate minority leader, argued with Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina about the 14th Amendment to the Constitution. The 14th Amendment grants citizenship to anymore born in the United States. Graham spoke out saying the Amendment was a mistake because children of illegal immigrants could become citizens if they were born in the United States automatically. He also stated as well as granting legal status to millions of illegal immigrants, he would also amend the 14th Amendment in order to nullify future unauthorized immigration. Republican and Democratic lawmakers were surprised with Graham’s proposal since he was basically the only Republican to negotiate with Democrats to create an immigration overhaul bill. This debate has been centered on the citizenship clause “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.” People against this amendment have argued that illegal immigrants are not under U.S. jurisdiction and therefore America-born children should not be automatically become citizens. The amendment has been practiced since the 1860’s and if the law were changed it would make babies born from Mexican mothers illegally they would become immigrants at birth. Opponents against...

...and BirthrightCitizenship
The United States Constitution is the supreme law of our great country. Found in our Constitution, is the fourteenth amendment. But, did the authors of the Fourteenth Amendment want or not want to grant citizenship to every person who happened to be born on U.S. soil? And does "subject to the jurisdiction" mean something different from "born in the United States,"?
First, let’s see exactly what the fourteenth amendment states:
“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” (1) XIV Amendment to the U.S. Constitution
Next, let’s examine the current requirements and policies in place for legal immigration and citizenship in the United States.
“Immigration is the act of entering a country with the intention of permanently living and/or working there, although U.S. immigration laws also cover entry into the country for almost any purpose, including temporary stays beyond a certain length of time. Below is an overview of immigration processes in the United...

...Debate on BirthrightCitizenship
Resolution: The United States should Abolish BirthrightCitizenship
Negating the resolution
3 Main Arguments:
Contention 1:
Sub Point A: We’re dependent on illegal immigrants, because according to a 2006 study by the Texas State Comptroller estimated that the 1.4 million undocumented illegal immigrants in Texas alone add $18 billion dollars to the states economic output, and more than paid for the $1.2 billion in state services they used by generating $1.6 billion in new state revenues If we were to erase birthrightcitizenship then there would be no motive for the illegal immigrants to cross over and thus would be the downfall of many states economic output, such as California, Texas, Florida, New Mexico and some of the northern states as well with immigration from Canada such as Montana. Immigrants pay more than $90 billion in taxes every year and receive only $5 billion in welfare. Without their contributions to the public treasury, the economy would suffer enormous losses. Sub Point B: Immigrants aren't just a weapon against inflation. The tens of thousands of illegal nannies in the Los Angeles area, for example, lower the cost of child care, freeing mothers to return to work. This in turn increases families' incomes, which encourages spending and fuels the economy.
Contention 2:
Sub Point A: If we were to get rid of...

...they will be likely to try it before they finish secondary school college. “‘Let’s pay attention”,said Dr. Curry, who is the dean of the College of Public Health at the University of Iowa. “ You may want to take a look at how you are drinking. If it escalates, you’re at risk, but you can change that now. ” I know what most young adults drink for social reasons or because they want to ‘impress’ some people they may know, but they don’t know any of the negative effects that can happen afterwards. Drinking today is much more open than it has been years ago. It’s only because of the numerous equipments that have access to the media and advertisements. Whilst researching the current law regarding alcohol I found out that the teen must be 18 or up before he or she can buy or drink alcohol beverages. Lastly, it is against the law for your teenager/es to possess alcohol on any street, highway, or public place, carry alcohol in a car, or be a passenger in carrying alcohol unless accompanied by parent of legal guardian. The problems that can arise from drinking, can involve around sicknesses, addiction, social behavior and even death! When we buy alcohol we have the responsibility to look after ourselves and not drink way too much but then again we have the right to purchase alcohol at the age of 18.
My first argument is about getting behind the wheel while being drunk. Statistics suggest that 60 percent of teenage deaths in car accidents are related to alcohol....

...﻿2014 The Time of the End
Introduction
Are 6,000 years of sin almost over? Will Jesus come in 2016? The Bible presents enlightening, logical, and compelling answers to these questions. In short, yes!
The 70 “sevens” prophecy in Daniel 9:24 has two fulfillments. First, the 70 “sevens” are 70 sabbatical cycles – 490 years, pointing to the first coming of Jesus as our Savior from sin.
Second, the 70 “sevens” are 70 Jubilee cycles – 3,431 years, pointing to the second coming of Jesus when His people will be permanently freed from sin. In the middle of 2016 the 6,000 years of sin on earth will come to an end, everlasting righteousness will be brought in, and Jesus will come again.
God’s Clocks of Sevens
When God created the earth He defined the weekly clock. He worked six days and rested the seventh. God named the seventh day the Sabbath. Every week since creation has followed the same pattern of six days for work followed by one day for rest.
God applied the same pattern to a week of seven years. He told the children of Israel to plant and to harvest their land for six years and then let the land rest the seventh year. He called the seventh year a sabbath. It is also called a sabbatical.
A third time scale for the weekly pattern is 7,000 years. For almost 6,000 years the earth has been corrupted by sin. In 2016 the 6,000 years will be completed and the people will be removed from the earth. Then the earth will...

...September, October and November in the northern hemisphere, and March, April and May in the southern hemisphere.
In North America, autumn is usually considered to start with the September equinox. In traditional East Asian solar term, autumn starts on or around 8 August and ends on about 7 November. In Ireland, the autumn months according to the national meteorological service, Met Éireann, are September, October and November. However, according to the Irish Calendar, which is based on ancient Gaelic traditions, autumn lasts throughout the months of August, September, and October, or possibly a few days later, depending on tradition. In Australia, autumn officially begins on 1 March and ends 31 May.
Etymology
The word autumn comes from the Old French word autompne, and was later normalised to the original Latin word autumnus. There are rare examples of its use as early as the 12th century, but it became common by the 16th century.
Before the 16th century, harvest was the term usually used to refer to the season, as it is common in other West Germanic languages to this day . However, as more people gradually moved from working the land to living in towns, the word harvest lost its reference to the time of year and came to refer only to the actual activity of reaping, and autumn, as well as fall, began to replace it as a reference to the season.
The alternative word fall for the season traces its origins to old Germanic...

...problem of business and government could not be more evident than in the case of the “rise of the Oligarchs.” By 1995, the Russia’s budget was in deep trouble, with expenditures rising faster than revenues. Yeltsin and the government negotiated a deal with a few powerful private banks to auction shares of the government’s highly prized mineral and oil asset for a time frame of one year. The catch was that if the government chooses not to repay back this loan at the end of one year, then the government would forfeit control of these assets.
In order to ensure that obtain these shares for as low a price as possible, the banks made an agreement that each would have their own share of the pie and that outside bids were magically void. The second part of their plan was to ensure that the government did not repay their loans, thus transferring ownership of the strategic resources. Yeltsin was an underdog for the upcoming elections, and the oligarchs felt that a new president might now honor the pledge auctions. The Oligarchs assembled formed a coalition with the goal to re-elect Yeltsin back to the office. In the end, they were successful and after the election, Yeltsin announced that the government would not repay the loans.
The problem in the relationship between the Russian government and its dealings with the Oligarchs deals with business ethics. Where should the line be drawn between doing business ethically and doing...